[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20160801125656.39c1737b@gandalf.local.home>
Date: Mon, 1 Aug 2016 12:56:56 -0400
From: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
To: Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
"H . Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, x86@...nel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Brian Gerst <brgerst@...il.com>,
Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
Byungchul Park <byungchul.park@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 05/19] x86/dumpstack: fix function graph tracing stack
dump reliability issues
On Mon, 1 Aug 2016 11:24:59 -0500
Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com> wrote:
> > > - print_ftrace_graph_addr(addr, data, ops, task, graph);
> > > +
> > > + real_addr = ftrace_graph_ret_addr(task, graph, addr);
> > > + if (addr != real_addr)
> > > + ops->address(data, addr, 0);
> > > + ops->address(data, real_addr, reliable);
> >
> > Note this changes behavior, as the original code had the ret_to_handler
> > first. This makes it second. (I fixed this below).
>
> Hm, as far as I can tell this actually keeps the original behavior. The
> "unreliable" ret_to_handler is still printed first, no?
>
Yep, I guess it does. I mixed up the meaning of "real_addr" and "addr",
and was thinking of the reverse.
-- Steve
Powered by blists - more mailing lists